![]() |
Joan Rosés is professor in Economic History at London School of Economics and new editor of the EREH |
How
did you get interested in Economic history?
My interest in History began relatively
earlier, during the last years of the primary school. Later, when I was about
16 years old, I discovered economics by chance. I was enthusiastic about two TV
series: "Free to Choose" of Milton Friedman and “The Age of
Uncertainty” of John Kenneth Galbraith. During my bachelor in History, my
favorite subject was, indeed, economic history. Then, it was obvious for me to
try to pursue an academic career in the discipline.
Could you describe your carrier briefly?
I finished my bachelor in History and
Geography in 1990 at the University of Barcelona. Then, I spent four years as
assistant in the Department of Economics at Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, while I
studied a two-year master in Economic History at University of Barcelona. In
1995-96, I moved to the European University Institute, in Florence, where I
finished my dissertation in 1998. My supervisor was Jaime Reis. In the same
1998, I published my first article at EREH. After a short stage at UC Berkeley,
I came back to Spain and get a post at Universidad Carlos III of Madrid. I was
at Carlos III for about 15 years (until September 2013). Since then, I’m
professor of Economic History at LSE. From mid-1990s, I published many articles
in all major economic history journals. My research interest covers many topics
but now I’m most interested in historical economic geography. Typically, I work
with a myriad of co-authors and I’m engaged in several projects at the same
time.
In general, what do you look for in a
submission and why?
It is difficult to say because each
submission is special and unique. Broadly speaking, a good submission in
economic history should contain good ideas and substantial evidence. Economic
history is an applied discipline and we need historical evidence to sustain our
arguments. However, we cannot write economic history in isolation. We should
know what other disciplines (particularly Economics and History) have already
said about our research topic. We cannot accept ahistorical articles or
research which ignores the basics of economics or statistics.
How would you describe the perfect EREH
article?
This is certainly a harsh question and I
haven’t the definitive answer. From the point of view of the Review, the
perfect article is an article that gets many citations. Unfortunately, editors
cannot predict ex-ante the amount of citations of any article. Then, the
perfect article is an article that combines an original contribution with good
scholarship. Typically, these articles
open new avenues for research.
What important changes do you see happening
in Economic History research right now? How do you think this will influence
future contributions in the journal?
It seems that the Cliometric Revolution has
been firmly established in the profession. Also, in the last five years, a new
generation of economists seems increasingly interested in the field and
economic history is expanding in many economics departments. Obviously, this
opens a new window of opportunity for the profession but also represents a new
challenge for us. We need to make the discipline more interdisciplinary and
relevant. I expect that the field will interact, even more, with other fields
particularly Development Economics and Economic Geography.
If you ask me for the hot topics over the
next years I expect to receive more submissions in Historical Economic
Geography, inequality and financial-monetary history (particularly articles
about crises and failed/successful monetary experiments). Another area which
should expand rapidly is economic history of developing countries. We need
urgently more research in Asia, Africa, South America and the Caribbean
countries.
No comments:
Post a Comment